Did Jesus really walk on water?

Medicine*Woman

Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!
Valued Senior Member
Xians believe Jesus walked on water. The Gospels don't agree on the story. Mark wrote that after Jesus finished prayer (6:46), he came down the mountain to find the ship containing his disciples in trouble. Jesus went to the ship; “he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them (v. 48). But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit. (v. 49 KJV).

Two questions come to mind. (1) If Jesus was god and part of the Trinity, who was he praying to on the mountain? Was God praying to himself in Mark 6:46? (2) Jesus saw his disciples in trouble, why would he want to pass by them in verse 48?

Matthew and John copied Mark’s story but left out Jesus “passed by them”. It did not make any sense for Jesus to pass by them knowing they were in trouble.

Shmuel Golding in his “The Light of Reason” volume 3 brings up two strong questions. He writes that Mark and Luke can’t agree where the disciples were going. Mark wrote they were going to the other side, Bethsaida, while Luke tells us very clearly that they were already in Bethsaida (Luke 9:10). John says, no they went towards Capernaum (6:17) and Matthew said they went into the land of Gennesaret (14:34).

Golding continues; “Furthermore none of these writers can agree on just how far Jesus walked on the water. Did he walk right across the sea or only half way across? Both Matthew and Mark are of the opinion that Jesus caught up with the boat in the midst of the sea, but John makes it appear that he walked the whole way across and caught up to them as they were coming near to the land (John 6:19-21.

Then Golding teaches us something important. “For those who understand the Greek text there is no problem in interpreting this story. John’s gospel records that when the disciples received Jesus into the ship; it was already at the land. They saw Jesus walking, not on the sea, but beside the sea as the Greek word ‘ept’ indicates.

In the dictionary, ‘epi’ is a preposition which can mean - in, - on, - alongside, or - beside.” In common Greek, the term "ep-" usually did refer to "alongside", since there was a more common slang term used for such.

The story makes more sense with the true translation of thw word. Jesus sent his disciples ahead of him in a ship and arrived by walking around the lake at the same time as them. Their surprise on seeing him caused them to wonder what kind of a man is this who can walk faster than we can row. They probably rowed one length of the boat only to be driven back two, because all the gospels claim there was a great storm at sea. Jesus probably thought it was safer and quicker to walk beside the lake than to go across it in a boat so he walked to the other side on dry land.”

Use of the word 'epi-' means ON! This is what Strong's Lexicon, a reference much used by fundamentalist Xians. However, you have to remember that Strong's is Xian in origin and supports Xian selling points for its use in among Xians. On page 1909 is says; epi epi ep-ee’ a root; ; prep AV-on 196, in 120, upon 159, unto 41, to 41, misc. 339; 896

According to this, you could present the incident of Jesus walking on the water in several different ways. Xians just want to make Jesus perform yet another miracle, forgetting the verses in Deuteronomy about the false prophet.

In-as-much, no one has proven Jesus, if he did exist was nothing more than a man, the Greek word ‘epi’ meaning alongside of fits this story. Therefore, as written, it could be correctly used BOTH ways, depends on which what message you want to present.

"Alongside of" is more logical and makes sense. However, if you want to make someone magical, you would use "on".

Since the NT was actually written for pagan Gentiles, a magical person would bring visions of "dancing fairies upon the pond", something uneducated minds would understand.

This appears to be another Greek interpretation by the KJV to promote their magical, myth of Jesus - which they interpret to suit their cause. Notice how Xians pick and choose bits and pieces of other writings to show Jesus with super powers, as being a deity - another pagan concept of a demigod. It's just another myth of how Jesus had super-powers over nature.

Excerpted from Xianity-Revealed
 
Did George W. Bush actually win the presidential election? One of those faith things...even though I sure wish Bush didn't win!
 
Originally posted by Davearchy
Did George W. Bush actually win the presidential election? One of those faith things...even though I sure wish Bush didn't win!

I believe George W. actually did win the presidential election. It had nothing to do with faith. Anyway, are you saying that you would believe a lie, but if you have faith that its not a lie, that would make it true?
 
Two questions come to mind. (1) If Jesus was god and part of the Trinity, who was he praying to on the mountain? Was God praying to himself in Mark 6:46? (2) Jesus saw his disciples in trouble, why would he want to pass by them in verse 48?

Matthew and John copied Mark’s story but left out Jesus “passed by them”. It did not make any sense for Jesus to pass by them knowing they were in trouble.
From Leonard Cohen’s song, Suzanne:

Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water,
And he spent a long time watching from his lonely wooden tower.
And when he knew for certain only drowning men could see him,
He said all men shall be sailors then until the day I free them.

1) The Son is not the Father, Jesus had to pray just like any other person. And he prayed frequently. Jesus was God from a human perspective. If we are the image, then Jesus is the real man. It's not becasue we have to pray that he had to - it's because He had to pray that we also have to.

2) Who says they were in trouble? They were having trouble with the strong wind, but they were all capable fisherman. The fourth watch is between 3 and 6 a.m., the "darkest hours". Jesus came unexpectedly, but they recognized him, and his presence brought calmness. His "passing by" might have been like the song says, Jesus waited for them to recognize him - after all, the previous verse says Jesus "went out to them", He wasn't going somewhere else.

He writes that Mark and Luke can’t agree where the disciples were going. Mark wrote they were going to the other side, Bethsaida, while Luke tells us very clearly that they were already in Bethsaida (Luke 9:10). John says, no they went towards Capernaum (6:17) and Matthew said they went into the land of Gennesaret (14:34).
In the first place, the exact location of Bethsaida is not known (Has Bethsaida been found?). But it was close to Capernaum and Genesaret (aerial view), on the northern shore of the lake. So Mark, Matthew and John really only differ to which side of the Jordan they where heading (Map of the area). Where you anchor and where you intend to go does not have to be the same place.

This is also true for Luke: they were going to Bethsaida, but (v.11) the crowds learned about it and followed them. So Jesus ended up talking to them "Late in the afternoon" at a "remote place away from the surrounding villages" (v.12). I.e. they were not yet in Bethsaida.

Alongside of" is more logical and makes sense. However, if you want to make someone magical, you would use "on"
Is it possible from the context in Mark to interpret the words as "alongside of" the water?

47When evening came, the boat was in the middle of the lake, and he was alone on land. 48He saw the disciples straining at the oars, because the wind was against them. About the fourth watch of the night he went out to them, walking [alongside?] the lake.
...
51Immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid." Then he climbed into the boat with them, and the wind died down.

53When they had crossed over, they landed at Gennesaret and anchored there.

The last verse makes the interpretation that they had already anchored when Jesus climbed aboard impossible. The next verse (54) states "and when they got out, immediately people recognized Him". That doesn't make sense if Jesus had in fact just got in.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Jenyar
1)Jesus was God from a human perspective.

Jenyar, if your prespective is different than that of Jesus, then your prespective is wrong. If Jesus percieved god as the father, then you should percieve similarly. Jesus never perceived himself as a god, he perceived himself as a human creation servant of god, and so if you really follow Jesus, you should percieve Jesus in the true light that Jesus percieved himself. There is only one correct prespective, which is submission to god.
 
Originally posted by Flores
Jenyar, if your prespective is different than that of Jesus, then your prespective is wrong. If Jesus percieved god as the father, then you should percieve similarly. Jesus never perceived himself as a god, he perceived himself as a human creation servant of god, and so if you really follow Jesus, you should percieve Jesus in the true light that Jesus percieved himself. There is only one correct prespective, which is submission to god.

This is what I believe, Flores. We should follow what Jesus taught, not not worship him as a god. Jesus tried to teach submission to god, but his followers (even today) submit to Jesus!

To Jenyar: Suzanne is one of my favorite songs of all time, and I believe it was inspired by a Jewish composer/lyricist. The name 'Suzanne' is Hebrew. The Roman counterpart is 'Lily.' This is special to me because my daughter Susan is named for her grandmother Lilliana, an Italian Catholic. Jesus's main teaching was submission to God. The "kingdom of God is within." Xianity teaches we are unworthy to see God, yet God dwells within our soul. Can you explain this?
 
Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
Jesus's main teaching was submission to God. The "kingdom of God is within." Xianity teaches we are unworthy to see God, yet God dwells within our soul. Can you explain this?
"He who lives in love, lives in God and God lives in him." (1 John 4:16)

originally posted by Flores
Jenyar, if your prespective is different than that of Jesus, then your prespective is wrong. If Jesus percieved god as the father, then you should percieve similarly. Jesus never perceived himself as a god, he perceived himself as a human creation servant of god, and so if you really follow Jesus, you should percieve Jesus in the true light that Jesus percieved himself. There is only one correct prespective, which is submission to god.
I completely agree. But we also have to ask ourselves honestly what Jesus meant - not only in what He said, but by who He was. He lived and spoke of God as nobody ever could (or if Islam's interpretation is correct, even should). If we can see God and (M*W will like this: ) ourselves most clearly through Jesus, what does that make Jesus, and what does that say about God who declared him His only son?
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Jenyar
"He who lives in love, lives in God and God lives in him." (1 John 4:16)


I completely agree. But we also have to ask ourselves honestly what Jesus meant - not only in what He said, but by who He was. He lived and spoke of God as nobody ever could (or if Islam's interpretation is correct, even should). If we can see God and (M*W will like this: ) ourselves most clearly through Jesus, what does that make Jesus, and what does that say about God who declared him His only son?

Jenyar, I agree with almost everything you say, but the difference in semantics are killing me. For instance, you say that god testified that Jesus is his son. I can't really disagree with you that Jesus was very special to god, so was a lot of people, he was called the Messiah, annointed, or chosen in my own book of Quran. He had a miracle birth and a miracle death, I don't know all the detail of the death, but the Quran implies that his death if it already happened or will happen in the future is nothing but miraculous. Still, I'll confess to all that, but to adopt the sonship concept is very difficult. First, you know that the son term was not used physically because god doesn't procreate like humans with sperms and stuff. Actually god doesn't procreate, but creates. So god created Jesus just like he creates anything else, and since we all unique in our purposes, we are all only something to god. We could be the only friend like Abraham, or the only person that talked to god like Moses, or the only person that lived in the stomach of a whale like Jonah, or the only last prophet like Muhammed, or the only person that was chosen for a virgin birth and as a prophet to Israel like Jesus. We are all unique and regarded as only in the eyes of god, but that doesn't imply that god is irrelevant or have appointed something in his place. Why is it so difficult for you to let go of the middle man. Noone is asking you to disrespect or ignore Jesus, I love my dad and repsect him so much, but I can't put him infront of god, and that doesn't imply that I don't love my dad.
 
I can't ignore Jesus for the simple fact that being the messiah and fulfillment of the Law makes Him the instrument of my salvation. And not through faith in Jesus, but because of faith in God.

The Quran recognizes Jesus as Messiah. Who does it understand the Messiah to be? I'm just wondering, because it is a Jewish term.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Jenyar
The Quran recognizes Jesus as Messiah. Who does it understand the Messiah to be? I'm just wondering, because it is a Jewish term.

Messiah literally means annointed, but implies a person with unique abilities to heal. God have given Jesus a unique ability to heal while he was alive. Jesus performed many miracles that are told in the Quran including curing the blind and the diseased. Given that, Jesus have never performed a miracle in which he has healed an unbeliever heart. Do you ever wonder about that? Why Jesus never could point his majical wand and change a person heart? Because that's the department of god and not Jesus. God judges and saves, not Jesus. Jesus was only an instrument of god to show us the way. Jesus performed the miracles of healing and was called the annointed in the sense that god equipped him with a powerfull tool to show people that his message is true, but Jesus had no power over people's hearts and he was never able or will never be able to interfere between a person's heart and god.

Noone is asking you to ignore Jesus. I for one, never have ignore Jesus. Jesus is a prophet of god whom god has prayed on him and blessed him. All the prophets are in my prayers, but I pray to god.
 
Originally posted by Jenyar
I can't ignore Jesus for the simple fact that being the messiah and fulfillment of the Law makes Him the instrument of my salvation. And not through faith in Jesus, but because of faith in God.

The Quran recognizes Jesus as Messiah. Who does it understand the Messiah to be? I'm just wondering, because it is a Jewish term.

The Hebrew word for Messiah is Shekinah I believe. Since God dwells within all of us just like she dwelt in Jesus, that makes the human race the Messiah. There is an old Hasidic proverb: "Be nice to the stranger sitting next to you, he may be the Messiah."
 
Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
The Hebrew word for Messiah is Shekinah I believe. Since God dwells within all of us just like she dwelt in Jesus, that makes the human race the Messiah. There is an old Hasidic proverb: "Be nice to the stranger sitting next to you, he may be the Messiah."
Actually it's Moshiach. And you don't make sense: "he may be the Messiah" - not "he is a Messiah". There's a difference.
 
Originally posted by Jenyar
Actually it's Moshiach. And you don't make sense: "he may be the Messiah" - not "he is a Messiah". There's a difference.

The Hassidic quote used the word "may" instead of "is." About "Moshiach," I guess it depends on the Bible.
 
Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
The Hassidic quote used the word "may" instead of "is." About "Moshiach," I guess it depends on the Bible.
Shekinah refers to the presence of God. It has only fairly recently been interpreted as referring to the arm of God - the Messiah. (the Shekinah).

That was my point about "may": If someone "may be" the Messiah, then it is possible that someone "may not be" the Messiah, which contradicts your statement that the whole human race is the Messiah.
 
Originally posted by Jenyar
Shekinah refers to the presence of God. It has only fairly recently been interpreted as referring to the arm of God - the Messiah. (the Shekinah).

That was my point about "may": If someone "may be" the Messiah, then it is possible that someone "may not be" the Messiah, which contradicts your statement that the whole human race is the Messiah.

It was an old Hasidic proverb, Jenyar. The point I was trying to make is they were waiting on the Messiah to come, so they created this little proverb saying "be nice to the guy sitting next to you, he "may" be the Messiah," meaning be nice to everyone because you don't know when the Messiah will appear. That's what the Hasidic Jews believed. That's NOT what I believe. I didn't make up this little proverb, I only copied it to make a point. I STILL believe that the human race is the Messiah. All clear now?
 
Crystal. Although I still think you are hijacking a Jewish concept and using it outside its meaning. Using a Hasidic quote only gives the impression that you expect the same kind of messiah they did, and it was a person. But if the human race is some kind of messiah, then a messiah to whom?

There is some truth to your statement in my view, though. As Christians are part of Christ, we should be part "messiah" as well. But that is only by allegiance, not by nature. The actual election, anointing and sending is still only done by God.
 
Originally posted by Jenyar
Crystal. Although I still think you are hijacking a Jewish concept and using it outside its meaning. Using a Hasidic quote only gives the impression that you expect the same kind of messiah they did, and it was a person. But if the human race is some kind of messiah, then a messiah to whom?

There is some truth to your statement in my view, though. As Christians are part of Christ, we should be part "messiah" as well. But that is only by allegiance, not by nature. The actual election, anointing and sending is still only done by God.

Jenyar, I quoted the proverb exactly as it was written. I'm not hijacking anything. It could mean different things to different people. I didn't write the damn thing, I just quoted it.

Whether we're Christians or not, we were all created by the one and the same God--whatever that God really is--I believe it is a forceof positive energy that can be explained by quantum physics. The ONLY reason we were all created by the same Creator (a much better term than God), is to contain the One Spirit of God in the human race. Try to think of the human race as one body and not individuals. This one body that was created by our Creator is for the purpose ONLY of being a spiritual vehicle. Being a vessel for God is not limited to Christians only! The One Spirit of God dwells within the body of the human race, therefore, we ARE the Messiah. It is not merely an allegiance or a natural thing. We are natural beings with a supernatural spirit. We are the Messiah on Earth. We are God on Earth. Our spirit lives forever with God. God made us this way for his purpose, not ours.
 
Smeat

Jesus Just Left Chicago (Gibbons/Michael/Beard)

Jesus left Chicago
And he headed down to New Orleans
Jesus left Chicago
And he headed down to New Orleans
Hey hey
Workin' from one end to the other
And all points in between

Took a drive through Mississippi
Muddy water turned to wine
Took a drive through Mississippi
Muddy water turned to wine
Hey hey
Went out to California
Through the points and through the pines

You might not see him in person
But he'll see you just the same
Might not see him in person
But he'll see you just the same
Hey hey
Don't have to worry about nothin'
'Cuz takin' care of business is His name

Jesus left Chicago
And he headed down to New Orleans
Jesus left Chicago
And he headed down to New Orleans
Hey hey
Workin' from one end to the other
And all points in between
 
Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
Jenyar, I quoted the proverb exactly as it was written. I'm not hijacking anything. It could mean different things to different people. I didn't write the damn thing, I just quoted it.
I just thought you were using it a bit recklessly. Anyway, you make it sound as if God has no choice in the matter, that He has to accept even people and actions who are unacceptable to Him. Your god sounds like a kid who built a dam, and when the flood came it swept him away along with his creation.

While you think he is going along with us, it is only because he is us, being swept along at our whims, hoping to get washed up somewhere or thrown clear.
 
Back
Top